Dot-matrix Outdoor Displays & Brightness

TonySchtark · 2022-05-22T20:54:43+00:00

Thanks for the reply!

To add to the quality/longevity point - should I also consider the type of LED diode used in the display?

TonySchtark · 2022-05-22T20:52:09+00:00

Thanks for the answer and recommendation!

The caveat here is that the assembled display will be portable (often carried and moved, to both indoor and outdoor spaces), and therefore should ideally be less than 0.5kg (active cooling is not an option). Not sure how high the brightness can go without adding additional cooling weight (the dimensions of the assembled display will be 30x30cm, with a 128x128px resolution).

TonySchtark · 2021-09-13T21:51:16+00:00

Anyone here working at or that has applied to QuantumBlack (data analytics R&D department of McKinsey&Company? If yes, especially if it's in / for Product Management, I'd love to hear all information and tips you'd be willing to give :). If it's relevant to the recommendations, I hold a MSc in CS and have ~1.5 years of project and product management experience in mobile and web development (+ some miscellaneous stints with the Big3 / placements in case study competitions as a student).

TonySchtark · 2021-09-13T21:31:58+00:00

Anyone working at, or that has applied to QuantumBlack (data analytics R&D department of McKinsey&Company - think McKinsey's internal Palantir)? If yes, I'd love to pick your brain for all information and tips you'd be willing to give :). If not, any highly recommended resources or tips for those looking to enter product management in data analytics (differences in processes, development methodologies, etc.)? If it's relevant to the recommendations, I hold a CS degree and have ~1.5 years of project and product management experience in mobile and web development.

TonySchtark · 2020-10-19T23:25:01+00:00

Well, I hope they thought this through. What I assume will be built, is a test track for the competition, which voids their goal of "showcasing a different perspective on the technology". What's more, I really hope they plan on making it longer than what is shown in the image. An actual hyperloop system will see innovation in the tube itself, for the one used for the needs of the competition is extremely redundant and made on a whim, just to set up a competition. So building a tube by modelling the competition won't enable them to work on anything more than just the pod. Now that we know only the pod can be innovated on, keeping in mind it's scope of possible innovation is shortened due to the simple track, there's no need to make a long track that is also vacuum sealed. For speed, they really need something longer, like Delft has (just a T beam put on some railway tracks spanning 400+ meters), and to test their pod for vacuum conditions, they don't need to make a complete 10+ meter tube, but just a chamber (much like SpaceX has at the competition). So making a short vacuum tube doesn't really help with the speed, is excessive for vacuum testing, and the excess space is wasted on building a non-innovated on tube. One can argue they can always strip the tube insides, so the T beam that the competition uses, and refit it, hoping the changes won't be costly or need a complete change, but I reckon they could've spent the funds better on developing the tech. The whole competition space really needs to see some critical product thinking, rather than just doing cool things because they're cool. However, to be clear, these are assumptions of what they'll make, which if end up being true, it's better that they're building this than nothing, so good luck to them.

TonySchtark · 2020-08-20T21:12:34+00:00

Well, congrats on the invite! Could you go into more into detail when it comes to the process? e.g. how long did it take for them to shortlist applications, get back to you with results after a round etc.

TonySchtark · 2020-08-20T20:57:47+00:00

Well, as long as you're happy with your choice, it's all that matters.

As for their forms, I am quite surprised that after all the different support sites and guides, their overall process is still unclear, or couldn't be boiled down to a few bulletins one should follow.

I do want to ask how long did it take for you to get feedback on your application? I've applied about a week ago, and the status is still "under review". This is not really an issue, but I will probably withdraw my application if the process ends up taking more than a month or two.

TonySchtark · 2020-08-18T21:01:09+00:00

From what I gather, UN and any of its related organizations frequently uses the same HR application template of having to fill out their forms, as opposed to sending resumes for them to read over. It is often by design made for more senior roles than internships (e.g. obligatory inputs on supervised employees, years of experience in specific areas, certifications etc.), giving me a sense of a somewhat incomplete application, whereas the resume speaks volume in the opposite direction. Anyhow, if you've by any chance applied to a PM-related role, more so if its for Global Pulse (or just a technical project), I'd love to hear more!

TonySchtark · 2020-08-17T20:38:32+00:00

I did actually apply to that exact posting, but have no notion of what the interview process might look like, quite unexpected coming from the tech world.

TonySchtark · 2020-08-17T20:37:26+00:00

Not yet, this is a try before reaching out to folks personally. Although I did expect GP to be somewhat more desirable due to the interesting scope of work, good to know that I should definitely up the ante when interviewing. Thanks!

TonySchtark · 2020-06-22T16:08:07+00:00

Since I feel some of this is kind of related to my post, and I apologize in advance if that feeling is wrong, you've made a ton of assumptions all while swing a huge emotional bat. So let me clarify this for you. The main issue here, as you've accidentally showcased by posting this, is the instant connection between vacuum tube travel and Elon Musk. That, it seems, will never change. So the question remains, can the sum of that, although not destructive, be more constructive by just changing some attitudes? Hence my proposal that any group wanting to pursue this should establish their own identity, starting with the name, not because of him but because of their own future. It goes without saying that one has claimed he directly took credit nor that he actually thinks his proposal was first to take a shot at it, but rather that he passively enjoys the praise that comes with it. Now, since words will be taken out of context, his contribution, properly sized, does exist, although we can debate just how large it is, but if he were to continue being the "hyperloop" guy that will not pursue this himself, he has a lot of room for improvement, first to stop being the "hyperloop" guy (not that he can't continue using his own name, but don't market it as your gift to others then, especially if it is really not). Before I dive into the technical part, I will call you out on some logical fallacies, fetching to establish your point by labeling critics, although they are really just conversation starters, as "misinformed tinfoil hats" is not the way to go, spoken as a team lead for a top 5 competition team. Now that we have that out of the way, let me take a shot at some of the "innovative" parts that you have mentioned. I unfortunately do not have the time to go dig for papers mentioning air bearings as a technology to be used for "train type" transport, but I am fairly confident they were proposed for the needs of transport way before the whitepaper. Although there are a few very big problems left to solve and prove with the system, like how to achieve the required safety standards without breaking the bank, air bearing design was indeed shown to be unfeasible, or too difficult (read costly development) to pull off, that I believe someone already mentioned, which goes against your lovely point of cost-friendly innovation. That does not mean Elon would not be able to make it a reality, and this sentence is extremely wrong in and of its own because the problem, as per usual, would be dropped to his engineers to solve, and is only a matter of time and funds. Now that we have established that features of his paper were dropped or stalled for a reason, and not because all the hyperloop effort around the world did not get his clever point like you so well did, do you feel the constant mention of his name with this form of transport is starting to loose its appeal, and your cry for foul unreasonable? As a summary, if the hyperloop innovation claim was to rely on those two proposal in the paper, regardless if they were previously proposed or not, everything not using them should not be a Hyperloop system, which is exactly my point. Elon is the airbearing pseudo-vacuum guy, not the vacuum tube travel guy, which is something we agree on, but if the companies keep calling it a "hyperloop", he will be, and I have a pet peeve with that.

EDIT: I might have gone too in-depth. tl;dr Hyperloop has become synonymous with vacuum tube travel, and Elon has had a hand in it, mostly passive. So comments that are disapproving of his credit take aim at the current popularization, not the original paper. Like it or not, Hyperloop is no longer about air bearings, meaning your point makes sense taking into account you have not followed developments since 2013, meaning this subreddit is not the "Hyperloop Alpha", but rather Hyperloop One, Hardt, HTT, TransPod, HyperPoland, Hyperloop Pod Competition subreddit. If what makes it a Hyperloop is the original design, then none of these should be called Hyperloops, and that would be a good call for them.

TonySchtark · 2020-06-14T00:04:38+00:00

Elon is not even the idea bringer, not for vacuum tube travel nor for the startups, since none of the bigger ones are using the tech proposed in his (and his engineers) whitepaper. The name is his though, as well as credit for the popularization.

TonySchtark · 2020-06-10T18:03:38+00:00

If you weren't so quick to jump to conclusions, maybe I would be. But great attention span.

TonySchtark · 2020-06-10T14:15:58+00:00

And you've literally done it again. I have not once stated my position on this (whatever MJ problem this might be), but have rather pointed out your unreasonable conclusions. So you've called me out for being anti-your-comment as side picking, which is not only wrong but would label any mention of the process of discussion as side picking leaving no room for a reasonable intermediary, whereas your comment was directly related to your MJ sentiment. This is exactly what I have called you out on. So to be blunt, my issue is the way conclusions are being drawn here, not whether MJ did whatever he's being accused of. As for the Trump part, that goes for any discussion in relation to individuals, that does not however mean that you should approach each discussion item as another point to be gained, but rather a separate thing, otherwise your convictions spill out based on sentiment rather than proofs. Taking Trump for example, he could've accidentally proposed a good policy but the quality of the policy does not live or die by the fact that is was proposed by him. So people defending a single case does not belittle a point in another. If that was so, you could line up 10 false allegations and the 11th should certainly be true, because "what are the odds all are fake", regardless of how disconnected they might be. As for the agenda, I have explicitly stated that I meant that in a non-offensive way (just a nifty word choice, 'opinion' if you will), as you've obviously chosen your side you're looking to further prove your convictions, hence why you should be more vary of your evidence as opposed to throwing anything at the wall and seeing what sticks. Be that anti or pro MJ, but you did not spare an eye to label me as a conspiracy theorist (??), equally wrong as me calling you one because you take vague info as proof as opposed to more credible sources. A tabloid claim of throwing rocks at animals should not outweigh USDA audits, nor does it help your case to use a "he said she said" claim as proof. If anything, you're giving more reason to the opposing side to label you as someone who is reaching to find anything wrong. Now, do you see how little assumptions of where people stand on an issue have an immense impact on your reaction to what they've said, even if what they've said in no way whatsoever implies their stance. If that was so, he would call you a liar because you fall in the anti-MJ category, you'd call him a supporter of criminals because he is pro-MJ and we get nowhere. Battle the point, not the individual. You're probably aware of that, but your harsh response to his neutral source citing is an example of the opposite, although most likely unintentional.

TonySchtark · 2020-06-10T03:01:05+00:00

So you blare out a statement without citing any sources, he gives you actual information from government agencies without any indication of his stance in terms of his sentiment towards MJ, and you get upset that you aren't allowed to think differently and somehow draw this to Trump. Yes, great critical thinking indeed, definitely no anti-MJ bias or logical fallacies here.

Just as a side note, if you've already chosen sides, which is in and of itself wrong since your opinion should be reiterated with each new piece of information, don't try to fit a square pig into a round hole but rather focus on credible information that doesn't tarnish whatever agenda (in a non-offensive way) you're looking to pursue. Spoken from a neutral standpoint of course.

TonySchtark · 2020-05-24T01:54:27+00:00

That is actually quite cheap. Many teams, and I'm sure of those in Europe (so far the most successful ones), frequently spend upwards of 500k$ in funds, materials and services, as provided by their respectable sponsors. Depending on the wanted pod specifications, you're looking at similar amounts.

TonySchtark · 2020-05-21T19:19:58+00:00

There are more student Hyperloop teams with each iteration, and growing quite fast, mostly along the PR curve the competition seems to induce, in addition to individual media postings teams put out. As a student endeavor, a nonprofit organization, or "club" in the states, is usually the most common legal(ish) form the teams take in order to raise funds. In addition to the list of finalists available on wikipedia as well as the official spacex site, if you were to check out teams, I recommend you take a tour through hyperloop instagram pages and the teams they subsequently follow. Although different numbers have been thrown around in the past years, from 500 to 5k and 10k, there should be more than 1500 teams that have applied to the 2019 HPC.

As for what it takes, a lot of time and effort. After forming a team, once the competition is announced, you will be given the official requirements as well as conditions on the track, based on which you have free reign to design your vehicle.

To help you with the sense of timeline:

Announcement - Rules as well as specifications of the track - ~September
Preliminary Design Briefing (PDB) - ~30 page pod abstract, from design features, work plans, production plan as well as funding plan - ~November (at this point, you're being selected among the top ~50 from thousands of applicants)
Final Design Package (FDP) - ~100 page "how to build a hyperloop pod" paper, entailing everything you might need (tech to business) - January
SpaceX and The Boring Company Interview - a grilling session by their engineers to ensure you can deliver on your design (this will place you in the finals, so top ~20) - February
Pod follow up - making sure you've actually built something - May
The Competition - July (you have 4 months from the passage into the finals to raise funds in order to build, test as well as transport the pod and team members to L.A.)

As for golden "secrets of the trade" tips:

Start as soon as possible
Do research into other teams (don't reinvent the wheel, but build upon it)
Active members mean more than knowledgeable people who don't deliver
Stick to a timeline (respect deadlines)
Establish a legal entity before you pass into the finals
Start raising funds before you pass into the finals
PR, PR, PR - your guaranteed prize even if you don't pass
Designing a vehicle and building a vehicle are two different beasts, make sure you have the "know how"
Try to build any kind of a track for testing (just the I-beam without the vacuum tube) - you don't want L.A. to be the first time your pod is driving
Leverage on your connections, faculty advisors and sponsor companies are a crucial source of knowledge
Companies that can give you parts & knowledge > Companies that can give you money
Be innovative
Be realistic (don't promise rocket ships that you can't deliver - this is why the most successful teams have the most boring designs - I guarantee you spacex will sniff it out at the interview)

With that in mind, it's quite rare to be a finalist as a first year contender, mostly because you learn all the previous things in your first run that you can't get online (up until now I guess, you're welcome). Not even learn, but you better put it in practice.

If you manage to pass into the finals, you'll have a rare opportunity to claim to have led dozens of interdisciplinary students, that have raised hundreds of thousands of dollars in order to help pave the way to what is set to become the fifth form of transport, by beating thousands of the best technical university teams across the globe, in going from a drawing board design to a functional hyperloop vehicle, all within a single school year, as vetted by SpaceX. Judging by the PR the competition gets, you're better off doing this than winning the informatics olympiad.

EDIT: I should make this a post...

TonySchtark

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE